The Quebec Court of Appeal on Thursday dismissed appeals from Tony Acurso, who, despite his strong criticism of the Crown and police conduct in the case, challenged the verdicts and sentences imposed on him after his trial on fraud and corruption.
However, their conduct did not make the former construction contractor’s trial unfair, the appellate court wrote in a detailed 76-page judgment.
The Court of Appeal held that Mr. Asked to surrender to the jail authorities within 1er To complete his four-year prison sentence in June. However, that person can still appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada.
In June 2018, there was Tony Acurso The jury found him guilty For his active participation in the corruption and conspiracy system that erupted in Laval during the reign of former Mayor Gilles Wylancourt between 1996 and 2010. Two people – and 35 others – were arrested in May 2013 by the ‘Permanent Anti-Corruption Unit’ (UPAC)
Mr. Accurso stated that he was unaware of the involvement of his companies in the scheme as he was not involved in day-to-day operations. He pleaded not guilty to all charges.
The system set up by Gilles Violencourt allowed Laval City to award public contracts to companies that offer a 2% discount to the mayor and his associates. Tony Acurso’s two companies, Construction Louisburg and Simard-Boudreau, obtained such agreements, which were written in the Court of Appeal’s decision.
Complaints regarding the first trial which was canceled
Tony Acurso raises a number of reasons for the appeal, many of which revolve around the abortion of his first trial (and subsequent police investigation).
It ended abruptly in 2017 when Mark Zendron, the money collector for Mayor Wylancourt, told a judge that his uncle had told him that he had seen Laval in connection with the Laval corruption system with suitcases filled with notes. Mark Zendron testified that he met Tony Akurso in the parking lot and offered him a $ 200,000 rebate. The woman shared this information with two other judges. The most extraordinary criminal investigation was launched to find out if anyone had tried to harm the jury.
The abortion of the first trial was in favor of the prosecution because it had already revealed its defense strategy; The Crown was able to receive and improve its evidence, Tony Acurso complained.
In his judgment on Thursday, the appellate court’s revelation to the jury quickly proved unfounded: the uncle had made a “bad joke” and had committed no crime. But police investigators continued their efforts, with jurists believing the accused would be acquitted. Having access to this information and jury opinion also unnecessarily benefited the prosecution, the former entrepreneur requested.
The court described the police’s conduct in the case as “problematic” and “unbelievably negligent” because investigators had obtained information about the judges’ deliberations, although it must have been confidential.
In the case of the Crown, it initially neglected to provide protection with a police investigation report on the judges – a “problematic” exception, the Court of Appeals writes, assuming that the conduct must be “confirmed”.
Incomplete, but regular
But if the conduct of the police and the lack of transparency of the prosecution provided “legitimate concerns” at Tony Acurso, did they give the prosecution an unfair advantage during the second trial of the former construction contractor? No, the court answers.
One of the judgments was that the facts revealed did not “establish the existence of a sloping will to use the criminal investigation to complete the evidence of the prosecution or to break the confidentiality of the proceedings in an illegal and inappropriate manner”.
And despite inquiring into certain aspects of the conduct of the police and the Crown, the judge noted that the Quebec Court of Appeal’s circumstances could not be considered “a clear case justifying the loss of judgment rendered by society”. She also confirmed that the four years imprisonment imposed on her was adequate.